About your Search

20130504
20130512
STATION
MSNBCW 20
KQED (PBS) 12
CSPAN 10
CNNW 9
FBC 8
KRCB (PBS) 7
CNBC 2
KTLN (TLN) 2
CSPAN2 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
KRON (MyNetworkTV) 1
LANGUAGE
English 142
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 142 (some duplicates have been removed)
organizations, the reporters questioning of jay carney, to have branched out considerably larger than one network. what is being called into questioned here is how truthful the administration was at the time when it had been saying that it was not doctoring or urging anyone in any part of the administration to say anything that wasn't the truth. but now it would appear from this abc study that looked at e-mails back and forth between the various agencies, that there might have been an effort to scrub clean warnings of an imminent militant threat in that country and beyond that country. james rosen at the state department with the implications from all of the above. james? >> neil, good afternoon. i was watching the portions top the white house daily press briefing conducted by press secretary jay carney. it was interesting to see carney struggle at times to explain some of his past statements about benghazi. in september of 2012, he said that in all of the initial evidence that the obama administration had, there was, quote, no evidence that the this was preplanned attack. the publication
. >> at the white house reporters bomb board barded jay carney with questions about the inner agency process that scrubbed of multiple riwlgsz to al-qaeda, terrorism and islamic extremists. that called into question his insist tins that he had only one small change. >> and assigning responsibility and preliminary assessments suggested and it was concern about preserving the integrity. >> reporter: may 20 issue of cites an email that general petraeus sent four days after the attacks in which petraeus is said to have expressed frustration at obama administration's revolve from references from the al-qaeda that the c.i.a. prepared the day before. >> i respect that the people who spoke up in the course of these hearings. you know, they were there. they felt the horror of that terrorist attack. and obviously it's emotional, but i hate to see it turned into a pure prolonged, political process that really doesn't tell us anything new about the facts. >> reporter: separately, abc news jonathan carl reports having obtained 12 versions of the benghazi talking points. according to that report, an early
scandal but i don't remember being under the gun like jay carney was today. they would like to think this briefing will solve everything and everyone there will continue to move on and pretend that benghazi never happened. however, i do think that the hearing the coverage, the additional information built on the steven hayes report from the weekly standard that we talked about last friday, built upon by jonathan carl of abc news who found that there were 12 iterations. two main things i think what remain to be answered but there are others, first is, what of the things that the white house says they did not want to speculate early on. except that they speculated and blamed the youtube video when it didn't have anything to do with the youtube video and it didn't have anything to do with it. second thing, if the white house had just stylistic changes to the talking points, it is puzzling to me there would be 12 iterations. plus, why would the c.i.a. revise its own talking points it had sent over before which completely changed the facts to the original talking points they had sent on t
not want to be today, it was white house spokesman jay carney. press grilling him over charges that the white house altered the initial cia reporting of the benghazi terror attack to down play the organized terrorism angle. playing up the spontaneous anti-american demonstration angle. carney denied any and all wrongdoing by the white house. >> on the substantive issues of what happened in benghazi and at that time what the intelligence community thought it knew, that was reflected in the talking points that were used again that weekend by ambassador rice and by others and members of congress. now when asked if the white house would release the email correspondents between it and the cia, carney said no. >> internal deliberations are generally protected. it's generally protected information that is not something that is regularly shared with congress. >> now, mr. carney gave long rambling answers to the questions. the white house did nothing wrong and susan rice did nothing wrong and the generated by republicans for political reasons. that's his story and as they say he is stick
. imgeraldo rivera"geraldo at reporting that officials including jay carney as you just saw subbornly denied that anybody working for the state or defense departments was blocked from testifying about the tragic events in benghazi last september 11th. specifically mr. carney was dismissive of somebody called an attorney saying she represents somebody. earlier this week on thursday i exclusively interviewd that attorney. victoria tensing a high ranking official in the regan justice department. they represent two potential whistle blowers, both of them state department employees who hope to testify next wednesday before a congressional committee. we learned their identities. victoria's client is greg hicks. deputy chief of mission in libya the number two man and we think the last person to speak to ambassador chris stevens whose last words shouted into his cell phone were we're under attack. we're under attack. joe's client is mark thompson is former marine who is deputy coordinator for counter terrorism at the state department and both hicks and thompson believe the previous investigation don
after benghazi so obama could get reelected. at the white house press briefing jay carney was asked whether or not political calculations were made during the talking points review process. watch this. >> the language that is e-mail is pretty clear. seems clear that there was an influence by the white house and the state department on the cia talking points. >> but again i think you are forgetting a couple of things here. the whose as i said made maid one minor change to the talking points drafted by and produced by the cia. >> concern was concern about how congress would react a factor in the talks? >> if you look at the development of the talking points, the answer to that is no. >> jay, you told us that the only changes that were made were stylistic. is it a stylistic change to take out all references to previous terror threats in benghazi? >> i appreciate the question again and what i was referring to was the talking points that the cia drafted and sent around to which one change was made. i accept that stylistic may not precisely describe the change of one word to the other. >>
. on september 13, jay carney attributes it this california youtube video. five days later, susan rice goes on television and says the same thing. and in fact, on the following tuesday, september 18, jay carney is still attributing this to a youtube video. why was the obama administration trying to suppress the events that gregory hicks -- >> your conclusion is based on hicks' testimony that they were trying to suppress -- >> yes -- >> the story that this was a terrorist attack? >> you can call it whatever they want. they didn't want to talk about what happened in benghazi that night. >> oh, and -- hicks himself said during the testimony that he was pressured into keeping his mouth shut by state department officials. the fbi did not talk to him during their investigation. this is about transparency, paul. it's a national security failure. and it's transparency in the aftermath. that's the problem here. the -- much of the media, particularly the liberal media, want to make this, oh, this is simple partisan bickering in congress. same old, same old. let's move on. no, this is about a -- an ad
much for benghazi happened a long time ago. jay carney postponed his regular scheduled briefings three hours as he held a discussion with the press corps trying to spin the attack in libya. two days ago we heard explosive testimony from three state department whistleblowers and today jonathan carl obtained 12 different edits to talking points that were the basis for the administration's leading message after four americans were killed by muslim terrorists. what were the edits about? hardly about scrubbing the facts that al-qaeda group was responsible. perhaps it was to protect president obama. carney and the white house have reason to sweat. here is carney's original explanation about edits. >> the white house has made it clear that the single adjustment to those talking points by either of these two institutions was changing the word to conflict because conflict was inaccurate. >> kimberly: here is what he said today. >> the white house as i said made one minor change to the talking points drafted and produced by the c.i.a. even prior to that had very few input on it. the other discus
delayed for several hours with spokesman jay carney taking heated questions on those benghazi talking points. that after reports that in edits from the state department, references to al qaeda warnings were taken out. questions about just how much the white house was involved in those edits and what was the motivation have been the subject of much scrutiny coming largely from republican quarters. and we just heard our own white house correspondent kristen welker asking jay carney, white house press spokesman, questions. we'll get to her later. >>> let's go straight to our panel. with us from washington, msnbc political analyst, and soon to be msnbc host, karen finney. in philadelphia, lehigh university professor, james peterson. karen, what is your reaction to this revelation that there were 12 versions which contained what have been described by members of the press as extensive changes to the talking points? >> i find it absolutely absurd and an obscene waste of time. i have to tell you, martin, having been a part of this kind of process where, i mean, and literally, i think as some
the beginning. so, now, the emails show. when you have jay carney's name, it doesn't matter. now nou 6 spokesperson that is criticizing somebody very popular in washington, they are digging deeper. >> andrea: they are. it's getting worse by the day. steven hayes, it's fantastic and explosive. it's everything we thought was here. we knew it as jay carney, isn't it self-evident and there was more to the story. victoria is very credible. when i talked on the radio show can necessity stop your clients from testifying. she said no, they can limit what they say. why they are making it so difficult is beyond me. honestly they should have let them go and testify and say we never got the communication from her and the secretary that did get a letter from issa. >> dana: let me go to the soundbite talking about the hearing. he had advice to republicans when they do the hearings. >>> republicans need to be really careful to ask a question and not give a speech, to listen to the previous question and then to follow up. lastly, to treat everybody in an impartial way looking for information and being
. white house spokesman jay carney said if it took place, the president would want the matter on on investigated. and the investigation in the compound in benghazi. we lost four americans in the attack on benghazi. law makers and family members have pleaded for answers. there was a hearing and they are speaking out. jim michael jordan said what we heard on wednesday may be the beginning. he is joining other law makers and saying more hearings are necessary to get to the truth. >>i >> even the democrats say we need morement we need secretary clinton. this comes as the white white plays dependence. the official talking points are revised 12 times. the white house and state department were going to give to the public through susanne rice and drop the reference to terrorism. doug has more. >> a tough day for jay carney. the white house press cooper and not just fox gained occupy carne who strugged to find answers with the 12 revisions on the talking points. the first draft said, we do know that islamic extremist participated in the attack. the final attack that susan rice delivere
and thisro is "the five". so much for benefiting happened a long time ago. white house spokesman jay carney postponed his briefing three hours as he held a background discussion with the press corp. trying to spin their handling of the aftermath of the 9-11 attack in libya. two days ago we heard explosive capitol hills testimony from three state department whistle blowers and today abc's jonathan karl obtained 12 different edits to talking points that were theg basis of the administration's misleading message after four americans were killed by muslim terrorists. what were theli edits about? hardly about scrubbing the facts that al-qaeda affiliated group was responsible. why were they made? perhaps to protect president obama who was up for reelection. carney and the white house have reason to sweat. here is carney's original explanation about edits to the talking points. >> the white house and state department have made clear that single adjustment that was made to those talk points by either those -- of these two institution were changing the word consulate to diplomatic facility because c
carney clearly playing defense on the talking points. >> jay, you told us that the only changes that were made by stylistic. is it a stylistic change to take out all references to previous terror threats in benghazi? >> well, i appreciate the question, again, and i think that what i was referring to was the talking points that the cia drafted and sent around to which one change was made. and i accept that stylistic may not precisely describe the change of one word to another. >> this was not a change of one word to another. these underwent extensive changes after they were written by the c aria. >> there was an interagency process which is always the case. a lot . >> that was jonathan carl asking that question. he's one who broke this story for abc. danielle, let me begin with you. when you look at the editing of the talking points, is this the way it looks when you're watching sausage being made, or is this evidence of some form of cover-up. >> well, i think it's a little bit of both, honestly. clearly, in any executive branch discussion, you're going to have different agencies fighting
, kelly. a tough day for jay carney. for the first time since the benghazi attack happened, the white house press corp, not just fox, ganged up on carney who is struggling to find answers to yesterday's abc news report that 12 revisions were made in the benghazi talking points. first issued by the cia. the first draft said, and we quote, we do know they participated in the attack. the final draft after the 12 revisions which susan rice delivered on the five talk shows made no mention of al-qaeda. her remarks attributing it to an anti-islam film was not true given what the cia knew. shear one of carney's attempts to explain that. >> we knew that -- we believed based on the intelligence assessment ks stream mists were involved, and there was suspicions about what affiliation the extreme mythses might have of the there was not hard, concrete evidence. >> one of the people now at the center of the controversy is victoria in newland, the spokeswoman. in e-mails obtained by the weekly standard and abc she objects to the wording of repeated cia warnings about the deteriorating situation in b
't have kings. >> jay carney says if the targeting did take place the president would want to the matter to, quote, thoroughly investigated. >> gregg: all right. molly, thanks very much. amid growing calls for a government wide investigation into the irs, maybe some resignations, we're going to talk a little bit later on whether a special prosecutor is actually needed to get to the bottom of what happened and whether any federal crimes were committed. don't go away. >> heather: there are new developments in the benghazi scandal. the white house is launching a new defend of the government's official assessments of the deadly terror attack. according to reports, newly leaked email excerpts show a string of changes to talking points that apparently scrubbed references to al-qaeda. doug mckelway has the latest from washington. >> reporter: really tough day for jay day any yesterday. for the first time since the benghazi attack happened. white house press corps and not just fox ganged up on him. that 12 revisions were made in the benghazi talking points, first issued by the c.i.a. the first d
. what changed over the course of those 12 edits in all of those email exchanges? >> exactly. jay carney today said only one thing turned out to be wrong. what he didn't say is what was left out. what changed between the initial version and the final version were a lot of details that were excised. the mention of al qaeda. the mention of ansar al-sharia an african based affiliate. the words were toned down. words violent demonstration instead of attack. and any mention of the c.i.a. having previously warned of -- of previous attacks that suggested that somebody should have known better about security. >> and did -- jay carney in that rather contentious white house briefing today explain why there were these changes or in some cases those omissions? >> what carney said is they wanted to make sure they only put out the information they knew to be true and didn't want to be speculative and put out information that would turn out to be wrong after more investigation. what he didn't really explain, though, is why he said or originally that the white house and state department actually only as
and it was just one of those days that everything went wrong? >> look at jay carney's performance. he explained away the talking points and terrorism and ansar al-sharia and it was cloerl an attack on the ambassador and how that got changed and he tried to explain it away. there is clearly a cover up and a fiction being written and i think the press is catching on to it. >> tell me what probably happens in the state department and the people who work there when they see people above them running for cover and saying if there was any blame it was the folks in the lower levels, does that lesson the confidence of people in the state department and make them think i am on my own down here? >> and if you lock at mr. hicks. they are not hostile to the obama administration. the foreign service and diplomat that exists in the state department are democratic and left loning. they would not be -- they feel they are tloun under the buzz. what can we expect to so unfold in the next few months and years. it could be a while before the layers of the onion come forth. we'll be right back. [ male announcer ] f
, supposed to come this hour. administration spokesman jay carney expected to address new questions about the benghazi attack and how it was handled or potentially mishandled. stay tuned for that. [ male announcer ] let's say you pay your guy around 2% to manage your money. that's not much, you think. except it's 2% every year. go to e-trade and find out how much our advice and guidance costs. spoiler alert: it's low. it's guidance on your terms, not ours. e-trade. less for us. more for you. it's guidance on your terms, not ours. can youlyric can.aid do this? lyric can. lyric can. lyric by phonak is the world's only 24/7, 100% invisible hearing device. it's tiny. but that might be the least revolutionary thing about lyric. lyric can be worn 24/7 for up to four months, without battery changes. call 1-800-414-5999 for a risk-free trial. cookie: there's absolutely no way anyone can see it even if they get right up to my ear. michael: wake up, go to sleep...showering, running, all your activities. lyric can also give you exceptionally clear, natural sound in quiet and noisy environments becau
? >> reporter: well, i think we can assume that the hearing that jay carney is about to hold that has been delayed for a few minutes now will be dominated by questions of benghazi. part of the issue here and one of the things that reporters will want to know about, probably the first thing is repeatedly here. the white house has said jay carney and others have said the only thing that was changed by the white house in this series of communications over the course of events in benghazi and that fateful day, that sunday when susan rice, the u.n. ambassador went on all five networks sunday talk shows and represented what happened in benghazi as the outgrowth of a responsibility demonstration, a reaction to that provocative youtube video which had in fact spawned demonstrations earlier in the week in cairo. what happened was a result of that. jay carney had said the only thing that the white house has changed were semantic words. he said repeatedly that the word embassy to describe it was changed to consulate. in fact it was not a consulate. that was the extent of the white house involvement i
they previously denied. in fact, today jay carney doubled down saying the white house made only one edit, changing the word consulate to the word diplomatic post. the thing is there were 12 rounds of edits. among the first thing taken out of the draft is islamic extremists with ties with al qaeda participated in the attack. jim acosta who you just stlau was in the room asking questions and he's "outfront" tonight. that was an intense press briefing. we don't usually see them like that. >> that's right, erin. and i think that's because of what the white house said back in november when jay carney went to the white house press briefing and told reporters that only a single adjustment had been made and then when you go through the e-mails, you discover very quickly, erin, that several adjustments were made and that they were not stylistic as the white house said repeatedly. they were content based. they had to do with victoria newlyn indicated in one e-mail that there was a concern about even mentioning this group that was linked to al qaeda because that might lead members of congress to beat the sta
memo in front of susan rice, back in november, white house press secretary jay carney said it was the intelligence community that prepared these talking points and the white house denied any involvement. they said neither the state department nor the white house was involved in this beyond changing one word. listen to this. >> what the house and state department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those -- these two institutions were changing the word consulate to diplomatic facility because consulate was inaccurate. those talking points originated from the intelligence community. they reflected the ic's best assessments of what they thought had happened. >> megyn: that's just not true. i mean, abc, steve hayes, they have the memos. and the extinns tensive correspondence between the state department, representatives of the white house, meetings at the white house, on the talking points and how they should be changed. believe me, it was over more than just one word. we will show you that. james rosen sold you some. we
, kate, that white house spokesman jay carney brought up, the person who was running the irs was a bush administration appointee. another interesting tid bit there. >> another interesting tid bit but be sure the white house will likely try to be distancing themselves from this especially amid all of the other issues swirling today. you can be sure as well that republicans on capitol hill will be investigating as they do. thanks so much. >>> still ahead i'll be talking to republican senator lindsay graham about just this, what he thinks of the irs action and scrutinizing tea party groups and also talking about much, much more news of the day. also, a cnn exclusive. you'll hear the daughter of the alleged cleveland kidnapper say he is now dead to her as she vows to cut off all contact with him, her father. >> awesome neighbors. thank you. we're not in london, are we? no. why? apparently my debit card is. what? i know. don't worry, we have cancelled your old card. great. thank you. in addition to us monitoring your accounts for unusual activity, you could also set up free account alerts. o
: that was white house press secretary jay carney moments ago, reacting to reports from the united nations suggesting that the syrian rebels are to blame for the recent use of chemical weapons. this as tensions escalate between the defiant regime and one of our best middle eastern allies, israel, after they reportedly launched a missile over syria, targeting weapons believed to be headed toward hezbollah. one syrian official calls the strike a declaration of war. what does that mean? or is that bluster? ralph peters joins us at the top of the hour today to discuss about what's happening here and what we're to make of the latest white house pronouncement that they believe it was the regime that used these chemical weapons. that's the red line, folks. that's it. >>> back to one of our top stories o'clock the widow of tamerlan tsarnaev had terror training materials on her personal computer. mark furman, former lapd homicide detective with me now. we don't know she's the one who posted them or reviewed them. but we are being told that it was on her computer and on top of that, mark, we have no
." white house spokesman jay carney says if this targeting does take place as the irs says it did, the president would want the matter to be thoroughly investigated. uma? >> thank you very much. >>> so with conservatives condemning the irs for what they're calling unlawful harassment, some tea party leaders are refusing to accept the tax agency's apology. the co-founder of the tea party patriots, jenny beth martin, is saying the irs' actions reach what she calls a new low in illegal government activity. she joins us now. thank you very much for being here. >> thank you. >> i know you're very angry anda clear sign of abuse by government power since you believe that the irs tried to block your ability to exercise your group's first amendment rights. do you think there was political pressure on the irs to target conservative groups like yours? >> reporter: i don't know if there was or not. they lied last year when they said they were not discriminating against us. clearly they were. and i think we need to have an investigation to see how far this runs and if there's another cover-up
, many tv shows repeating these talking points. >> bret: right. about talking points, jay carney, who talked about it before, was asked about it today and what the new revelations and talking points steve hayes, that you put in the weekly standard with your reporting. >> remains the case is the intelligence community, c.i.a., drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points. the fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the white house were stylistic and nonsubstantive, corrected the description of the building where the facility in benghazi, from consulate to diplomatic facility, and the like. >> bret: stylistic and nonsubstancetive. >> yeah. what jay carney said there is untrue. we have the talking points. we've seen them. we've seen the changes that were made. they were dramatic changes that came out of this meeting, the deputies committee meeting, top obama administration officials on the morning of september 15. they took out references to islamic extremists. the talking points in that meeting we
. about talking points, jay carney, who talked about it before, was asked about it today and what the new revelations and talking points steve hayes, that you put in the weekly standard with your reporting. >> remains the case is the intelligence community, c.i.a., drafted these talking points and redrafted these talking points. the fact that there are inputs is always the case in a process like this, but the only edits made by anyone here at the white house were stylistic and nonsubstantive, corrected the description of the building where the facility in benghazi, from consulate to diplomatic facility, and the like. >> bret: stylistic and nonsubstancetive. >> yeah. what jay carney said there is untrue. we have the talking points. we've seen them. we've seen the changes that were made. they were dramatic changes that came out of this meeting, the deputies committee meeting, top obama administration officials on the morning of september 15. they took out references to islamic extremists. the talking points in that meeting were basically rewritten and to a certain extent, the night before b
regarded figures in national -- >> you have been listening to jay carney answer myriad questions when it comes to what happened in benghazi, libya september 11 of last year. jake tapper will be all over it this next hour. that does it for me here in a very rainy cleveland, ohio. thanks for being with me. "the lead" with jake tapper starts now. >>> the white house facing some tough questions. i'm jake tapper and this is "the lead." the national lead, michelle knight in cleveland is now free to come and go as she pleases after she was released from the hospital this afternoon. but questions are swirling about why police took her name off the fbi data base way back in 2003. >>> the politics lead. originally the obama administration talking points on the terrorist attack at benghazi reportedly mentioned warning signs and al qaeda. 12 revisions later, poof. vanished. now the white house and the state department have even more explaining to do. >>> and the world lead. trapped for 16 days in the debris of a building collapse that killed 1,000 people. but today an amazing story of surviv
? >> pretty rough day for jay carney at the white house. >> that's right, harris. his was to be sure uninvisible duty today. the white house press secretary struggling to explain why interagency team labor day through 12 versions of the now infamous talking points that u.n. ambassador susan rice delivered on the sunday shows september 16th, five days after the attacks. spontaneous protest gone awry and later shown to be false never more so than now when the drafts of the talking points and emails regarding them are appearing in the "weekly standard" and on abc news and show how multiple early references to involvement by terrorist groups were were deleted. >> we knew that -- we believed, based on the intelligence assessment that extremists were involved and there were suspicions about what affiliations those extreme i.ists might have. there was not hard, concrete evidence. >> september 14, however, the first cia draft of the talking points as published in the "weekly standard" stated outright, quote: we do know that islamic extremists with ties to al qaeda participated in the attack
the benghazi attacks 12 times in the hours following the incident. white house spokesman jay carney disputes claims the e-mails suggest the white house was more involved in the crafting of talking points about the attacks than about what actually happened. >> republicans have chosen, in the latest iteration of their efforts to politicize this. to provide, you know, leak this information to reporters, information that we provided months ago, to republican lawmakers from the relevant committees, and republican leadership, as well as democratic. >> all right. meanwhile republicans are asking for investigations into the irs. the agency apologized friday after some employees of their cincinnati office were found to have flagged groups with the words tea party or patriot ahead of the 2012 election. those groups received extra scrutiny during the tax exempt application process, including being asked to provide a list of donors. so joining me to talk about all of this. national political reporter for politico wanda summers and congressional reporter for "the washington post" ed o'keefe. thanks for b
. all the news today made for a testy white house press briefing with press secretary jay carney clearly playing defense on the talking points. >> jay, you told us that the only changes that were made by stylistic. is it a stylistic change to take out all references to previous terror threats in benghazi? >> well, i appreciate the question, again, and i think that what i was referring to was the talking points that the cia drafted and sent around to which one change was made. and i accept that stylistic may not precisely describe the change of one word to another. >> this was not a change of one word to another. these underwent extensive changes after they were written by the cia. >> there was an interagency process which is always the case. >> that was jonathan carl asking that question. he's one who broke this story for abc. danielle, let me begin with you. when you look at the editing of the talking points, is this the way it looks when you're watching sausage being made, or is this evidence of some form of cover-up. >> well, i think it's a little bit of both, honestly. clearly, in an
's fantastic and it's explosive. it'sta everything that we thougt was here. we knew it as jay carney would say, isn't itself evident this they bungled this thing and there was more to the story? as you point out, victoria toensing is very, very credible. when i talked to her on my radio show, i said, can they stop your clientske from testifying? she said no, andrea, they can't. they can just limit what they cano say. and why they're making this so difficult is beyond me. honestly, they should have justt let them go and testify instead of saying, we never got the communication from her and defending the secretary who did get a letter from darrell issa.a >> because we are short on time, let me go to the sound bite from charles krauthammer talking about the hearing next week and get thoughts because he had advice for republicans when they do the hearings. >> republicans need to be real careful to ask a question and not give a speech, to listen to the previous question and to follow up and lastly, to treat everybody in an impartial way, looking for information, and being willing to accept human er
] >> you can do both. >> jon: what about jay carney getting up there and dismissing any media concerns as sort of old news? >> well, this is a strategy any administration dealing with any scandal or any inconvenient story, it's the go-to strategy. it's textbook where you stonewall. you don't answer questions. and then you let the time pass and then you say it's old news. bill clinton, every single thing that came up in the clinton administration, this is what they do. they might release a lot of documents too to say look we have released 10,000 documents at the same time they haven't answered the important questions. >> jon: if there are new hearings and there are, congress is going to be starting some new hearings this week. are they going to be taken seriously? are they going to get media attention? >> i would hope. so i would think actually now for whatever reason it has risen to the attention, it has boiled that pot so that people are paying attention. >> why hasn't it taken so long? >> because this issue has become political. and the fact that the death of an american ambassador
that opposition groups have used serif gas. spokesman spokesman jay carney says the obama administration still believes it is highly likely president assad's regime is behind any chemical weapons use. starts ourdall coverage. >> there are an increasingly disparate array of rubble groups in syria. firefights like this one, in aleppo, are part of everyday life. now, a senior un official says testimony gathered from vic ends by her human rights team suggests that some rebel groups may also have got hold of and used sarah and nerve gas. thatwas a bit stupefied the best indication we got about the use of nerve gas by the opposition. haser investigating team not been allowed inside syria. their evidence is gathered ,econdhand from victims doctors, and crowded refugee camps across the border, where so many have fled. this afternoon, the un stressed the latest findings are not conclusive. there is no proof yet that chemical weapons have been used by either side. but pictures of victims clearly in distress suggests there may have been instances were chemical agents have been used. one attack, it is all
about president obama's opinion earlier this week, press secretary jay carney says the president is aware of the case and cannot take a position on an ongoing trial. >> wendy: and coming up, millions of indians live a lifetime in poverty. you'll meet one woman who rose from the trash heap, and the christian ministry that helped her. >> wendy: in recent months, india's women have been rising up to protest sexual violence and degradation they face on a daily basis. they say india society needs to cultivate a new attitude of respect towards women. >> george: for years, christian ministries have been working to help indian woman overcome the odds. i met an indian woman who overcame terrible poverty and abuse, and also forgave those who put her in harm's way. it has been said the most beautiful people are those who have known defeat, struggle, and have found their way out of the depths. rachja is one of them. >> i've had a difficult life during my childhood, and experienced more horrible things than most people my age. >> george: at a young age, she was forced by her parents to join t
with press secretary jay carney earlier today. a major topic of discussion was the report on benghazi. it says the c.i.a. talking points used by susan rice were revised by the state department to remove any references to terrorism. carnie discusses the acknowledge by the i.r.s. that they unfairly audited groups for their tax status. his briefing is about an hour. >> good friday afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. thank you for being here. i appreciate your patience. before i take your questions i want to note because it has been reported we did as many of you know, have a background briefing here earlier at the white house. i think 14 news organization were represented from online, print and the like. we do those periodically. we hope that the participants find them helpful. no one here thinks that is a substitute for this briefing that is why i'm here to take questions and with that i will go to the associated press. >> thanks, jay. two subjects starting out with the i.r.s. issue. i.r.s. says they flag conservative name -- groups. [unintelligible] when did the white house become aware t
is "the five". so much for benefiting happened a long time ago. white house spokesman jay carney postponed his briefing three hours as he held a background discussion with the press corp. trying to spin their handling of the aftermath of the 9-11 attack in libya. two days ago we heard explosive capitol hills testimony from three state department whistle blowers and today abc's jonathan karl obtained 12 different edits to talking points that were theg basis of the administration's misleading message after four americans were killed by
with shocking news on chicago? why doesn't the press corp when they are sitting with jay carney why don't they say why is chicago dead last in enforcing crimes with guns? there are drugs and cocaine being sold. gangs are trafficking 13-year- old girls which gun owners know the truth. >> have they lost their minds mr.r at the white house? president we will stand and fight throughout this country as americans for our freedoms. we promise you that. when it comes to that, sir, you keep your advice, we'll keep our guns. the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. >> ladies and gentlemen, members of the national rifle association please welcome my friend, my fellow virginian, wayne lapierre.[applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. thank you, you are kind which we do it all together one by one and people like you all over this country. [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. thank you houston and good morning. colonel north, i really appreciate your kind words. you are a genuine american hero and for your service to god, to our c
began with syria. white house press secretary jay carney earlier today rejecting a united nations report that concludes the chemical weapons are being used by the syrian rebels, not the regime which president obama had declared to have crossed the so-called red line. >> we are highly skeptical of suggestions that the opposition could have or did use cut weapons. we find it highly likely that any type of chemical weapon used that has taken place in syria was done by the regime, and that remains our position. lou: whether skeptical or not, here is the just one week ago announcing that the obama administration was then confident that chemical weapons had been used. and he neglected to mention the white house itself had called for the united nations to investigate those reports. the president by that time was trying to walk back is redline rhetoric while acknowledging we simply don't know what is happening with serious chemical weapons. >> we have established with varying degrees of confidence that chemical weapons were used in limited fashion and syria. and the agent sarin, as we have said.
a declaration of war and all the options for retaliation were open. at the white house press secretary jay carney said the u.s. supported israel's option to attack the assad regime. >> john: the transfer of sophisticateed weapons to terrorist organizations like hezbollah is certainly a concern and threat to israel and they have a right to act in response to those concerns. >> but with the reports mounting of sarin nerve gas attacks on syrian silverns, senators menendez announced they could arm the syrian rebels. and it was suggested on sunday that the u.s. could army some of the rebel groups fighting assad. >> we needs a game changing action. no boots on the ground. establish a safe zone, protect it and supply weapons to the right people in syria who are fighting for obviously the things we believe in. >> the idea of getting weapons in, if we know the right people to get them, my guess is we'll give them to them. >> meanwhile an official with the united nations commission of inquiry on syria suggested that while it was likely nerve gas had been used the assad regime might not have been res
here. >> hi, sean. >> jay carney said that's eight months ago. hillary, what difference does it make? let's start at the beginning. requests for security were denied, congressman issa. why? >> october 10th we made the case it was denied and at that time people closely associated with some clear professionals really believed it was based on this concept of normalization. in other words, pretend libya was safe and the war on terror was behind us. we still believe that's probably the genesis of so much of the coverup, if you will, that occurred immediately following it. but you said very well in your intro, there was a campaign going on, there was a president trying to win re-election, and the changes were made at a very high level. >> congressman, there was -- we now have discovered through temperature, greg hicks among others, there was a c-130 ready to bring reinforcements to help those that were under fire and they were ordered to stand down? >> the administration, including secretary pennetta, were very crystal clear, there were no military assets, but itch to tell you, we had prox
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 142 (some duplicates have been removed)